Barack Obama spent too much time on a campaign trail chanting, "Yes we can", with crowds begging for change.

The president's lieutenants have been so busy branding the bedraggled opposition the "party of no" that they can't find the testosterone to recommend that their boss occasionally utters a definitive 'NO'.

He should have said no to the generals who want to beef up the counter-insurgency, sacrificial coalition lambs in Afghanistan. Generals love to win wars and provide markets for the military-industrial complex.

"Old soldiers never die; they just fade away." The young come home in boxes or grace the VA hospitals limbless and stressed out.

Warriors only know how to say no to gays. Their commander-in-chief needs to tell them no more wars, not even disguised ones.

At least 2,985 people died in the 9/11 attacks. Operation Enduring Freedom started on October 7, 2001. It's been eight years since the US entered Afghanistan as part of America's "global war on terror".

So far 1,480 coalition forces have died and civilian casualties are between roughly 9,000 and 27,000. How many need to die in revenge for the 3,000 dead on 9/11? It's time to say no.

Obama should have said no to the nay-sayers on healthcare reform. Harvard researchers published a study in the American Journal of Public Health, which reveals that roughly 45,000 American adults die every year because they're not covered by health insurance.

The profiteers in the half-baked, over-priced insurance companies don't care about the deaths they support. The bribes paid to senators by insurance company lobbyists have those extortionists gloating, while the president sits on his 'No'.

The health insurance conglomerates are only a part of the larger economic maelstrom that controls America and the world - the banks.

With the industry pimps running the Federal Reserve and the Treasury, the banks will never hear 'No' from Obama to their unbridled gambling and self-rewarding operations.

Now the president has Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran to deal with. If "Yes we can" means anything, it means getting out and saying 'No' to the Zionists vying for total control of the Middle East, through its American surrogate's bombs and missiles.

It means putting Israel on a leash with a resounding 'No' - no to settlements, no to denial of war crimes, no to boondoggling on negotiations with the Palestinians and no attacking neighbours north and south, under the pretence of self-defence.

What has Obama said no to? To his credit, he scrapped the missile-defence agreement the Bush Administration negotiated with Poland and the Czech Republic.

It was a threat to Russia under the deceptive propaganda calling it a defence against Iran.

Thankfully, Obama nixed earmarks in legislation ('Earmarking' is the term used to refer to a provision in legislation that directs funds to be spent on specific projects. Typically, legislators seek to insert earmarks which direct a specified amount of money to a particular organisation or project in his/her home state or district).

Deserving approval, he also said no to additional Wall Street bailouts. Though his exact position is unclear, he said no to nuclear weapons. Finally, the president has said a healthy no to human cloning.

On the distaff side, Obama put the kibosh on a climate change law this year. He has said we need no new stimulus package when unemployment is soaring out of control.

Obama should have said no to the Nobel Peace Prize. Or should he? By accepting the prize, he's tying his own hands. The Nobel Committee may be cleverer than anyone thinks. How can a peace-prize winner continue wars? Afghanistan bye-bye. Iraq bye-bye. No bombing Iran! Try Netanyahu as the war criminal he is. Start getting along with the UN. Turn the only rationale the committee had for the award into an albatross around Obama's neck. Perhaps he will learn to say no when he should.